Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch was the first one appointed by Trump
due to the fact he seemed to align with the administration’s general
directions and wishes. However, in a surprising and controversial turn
of events, Justice Gorsuch recently ruled in favor of an immigrant who
was fighting
deportation. Gorsuch’s vote was actually the one that tipped the scales and
concluded the case.

James Dimaya was convicted twice in California for first-degree burglary,
or entering an occupied residence in order to steal something of value,
or to commit another serious felony. The crime was categorized by the
Justice Department as a violent, aggravated felony. Under this definition,
it can act as grounds for deportation.

The Supreme Court ruling challenged the Justice Department’s definition
of violence, though. It referenced a 2015 Supreme Court ruling that declared
the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) defined “violent felonies”
too vaguely to be used in any constitutional context. If the definition
were to be upheld, then all courts would be forced to make decisions based
on unpredictable abstracts, not objective guidelines.

Justice Gorsuch Explains His Decision

Perhaps in anticipation of the controversy that was sure to follow his
decision, Justice Gorsuch prepared a statement as well to explain his
ruling. In it, he noted the arbitrary power necessary under the preexisting
laws were rooted in antiquated laws and legal standards. He went as far
as to discuss the original definitions of treason laid out during the
American Revolution as being intentionally vague enough to serve the purposes
of the revolution itself.

The Supreme Court Justices who did not side with Gorsuch were apparently
not quite surprised by his vote. In a previous discussion, he questioned
the definitions of “violent felonies” and noted Congress had
struggled to make a clear definition during previous oral arguments.

Implications of the Deportation Defense Ruling

Political upsets aside, the ruling tipped by Justice Gorsuch brings many
implications and legal impacts. It demands clear standards for deportation
rulings that eliminates the discretion of immigration court judges. The
Supreme Court’s ruling has also essentially undone a law that played
an integral in countless deportations throughout the years, potentially
barring future deportation cases brought forth on similar circumstances.

For more information about this ongoing story, you can
click here to view a full article posted by
The Hillnewsgroup. If you require the assistance of a Dallas immigration attorney
for a deportation defense case of your own, call
888.867.5191 to connect with Mathur Law Offices. Our law firm has been representing
Texans in immigration cases for more than 15 years, creating an impressive
history of
successful case results. Find out more by scheduling your
initial consultation today.